Feature Request
Feature Description
I find the organization of the repos a little messy. Sometimes I want to run NodeChain with my own RPC endpoints, and I have to modify the code manually. To improve the workflow, I'm suggesting three different changes.
1. Create a configuration file
Instead of having all RPC endpoints in the code, we could attach a "configuration.json" file that will be parsed by NC. The standard could be something like:
{
"networks": {
"bitcoin": {
"enabled": true,
"config": {
"rpc": "http://blahblah",
"electrumrpc": "http://blahblah"
}
},
"ethereum": {
"enabled": true,
"config": {
"rpc": "https://blabla"
}
}
}
NC will take all configurations from that file, and the configuration file will be set up by a configuration script. The first node ("ethereum", "bitcoin")... could be matching with the name of the package
2. Split into two repositories
Not everyone that runs the Connector wants to run the Dockers, and not everyone running the Dockers wants to run the Connector. Instead of this, we could split everything inti two repos. We could, also, update the init script, allowing the user to setup their own RPC endpoints (for those who do not want to run the Connector and just the native Nodes). It could have as default the RPC of the Connectors, to maintain a compatibility.
3. Upload NodeChain-Connector to Docker Hub
I propose, for better organization, uploading the Dockerfiles (and software) to Docker hub. That way, we will keep splitting the Connector code, the Docker-compose and init script code, and the code of the external software.
Docker-composes will have the image of NC, Bitcoin, Electrum... directly pulled from Docker Hub, which will keep the code and workflow cleaner.
Use Case(s)